Slashdot Mirror
Cracking GSM
RobertM writes "Professor Eli Biham, one of the worlds most famous crypto analysts, together with two of his students presented an interesting paper on flaws in GSM at the IACR Crypto conference. The GSM association is not happy. Read more on theReg." There's also a Reuters article about the situation.
I wonder how long it will be till they attempt to use the DMCA to silence him - this is after all a typical scenario for the DMCA to be exploited in order to gag scientists and cryptology experts.
Sadly, I wouldn't at all be surprised to see this end up on chillingeffects in the near future.
Hmmm. If I remember well, other Israeli crypto researchers, including Pr Shamir (of RSA fame, Rivest - Shamir - Adelman) mentioned a couple of years ago that GSM crypto could, theoretically, be cracked almost in real time by a (relatively) low-powered machine.
GSM specialists have known for a number of years now that GSM crypto was not that good. Interestingly enough, GSM crypto was designed by French 'military specialists', which has raised the usual (probably justified) suspicions of backdoors.
Sorry for not being able to produce more info, but I am sure other Slashdotters will have interesting links to supply...
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
It has long been suspected that GSM encryption was specificaly designed with some 'weak spot' to allow law-enforcemant monitoring.
Does anyone know if the article is available online?
I'd like to know if this flaw looks more like a mistake or somthing more intentional.
None of the meadia people who spoke about it seem to understand that "Instant Ciphertext-Only Cryptanalysis" means you are effectivly not protected at all.
As of Postgres v6.2, time travel is no longer supported.
REMOB anyone?
...."
REMOB (Remote observation mode) is a TSPS console feature of the american telephone system to allow inward ops to monitor a suspected phone that might be "off the hook" prior to interrupting the line for "life or dire emergency" with the 500Hz tone and issuance of the frequently heard phrase "This is the att operator do you wish to disconnect this call you have an emergecy phone call from
but PRIOR to that for 30 second maximum bursts you get to hear an inverterted sound wave... which you can record.
better... the fbi has is setup to cascade overlapping series of REMOB snippets so when one ends (on any CLASS capable ESS r5) another takes over.
This way no interrupt chirp is heard by the victims, and lots of trivially "scrambled' speech can be secretly recorded.
i have never ever ever seen this in print or any edoc in history of phreaking.
I have seen telephon reps state to congree that REMOB did not exist.
it exists.
it does not take outside intercepts (ECHELON) as reported on 60 Minutes, or any NRO or NSA budgets,
it only takes a 6 digit code and the correct connections to do REMOB.
REMOB makes intercepting cell phones laughable in comparison.
besides... the German Gov records ALL cell phones under that alleged statement that in theory it COULD intercept the airwaves anyways if they tried. Remeber the slashdot article?
also the us gov allows no-warrant affixing of GPS locater emmitter bugs under your car frame under the assumption that it could visually track you from their air if they had the money anyways. Remember the Scott peterson case this summer? No initial warrant to put the gps bug on his car.
recording and intercepting ALL cell phone traffic at the point of origin on the LAND LINES is what the fed gov assumes is their right!
no need to mess with intercepts.
July 1983 the us supreme court ruled the public had a right to intercept and use all radio trasmissions INCLUDING call phones. Then they pverturned it partly years later.
today it is LEGAL for the cops to buy and sell equipment to record cell phones, but not the public across state borders. you have to build it from scratch yourself for your own hobbyist needs... and then its legal to use.
but REMOB is far far more humorous.
I know it exists.... first hand
In the bad old days of analog mobile phones, there wasn't even encryption on the signal. You could literally walk into Radio Shack and walk out carrying a scanner capable of receiving mobile phone frequencies. (They eventually banned the sale of scanners capable of receiving those frequencies.) Later, TDMA and CDMA technologies made it more difficult to intercept signals, but all that's required is the right decoder.
Encryption of the call is a fairly recent trend and I think it's a terrific idea, but any encryption can be broken in time. While the odds are low that someone may be listing in, guaranteed privacy is impossible.
I think as a whole, we tend to trust in technology without really understanding it. I'm reminded of two engineering students who were visiting my apartment in college, and showing off their new cell phones by one calling the other. They were quite surprised when I was able to intercept their call with a cheap radio scanner. They had no idea their call was not private, simply assuming that the technology was secure. It wasn't.
Criticism, however, allowed him to improve himself.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
If this cracking method is indeed patented then it must be publicly released for anyone to read and understand. But public release would seem to violate DCMA and stifling the publication would seem to violate the constitutional underpinnings of the patent system (to encourage innovation by both granting monopolies and making inventions publicly accessible for further innovation). Does this make DCMA unconstitutional???
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.